Video purporting to prove the one true god (Allah) to atheists. Starts off with a wonderful note that he is, in fact, an atheist with respect to all gods except his, with of course no explanation as to why this makes sense. Then the song for his show is just so fantastic and the main reason I'm posting it. Song starts around 1:30. Watch the rest of the video at risk of wasting your time.

"When I come to my own beliefs, I find myself quite unable to discern any purpose in the universe, and still more unable to wish to discern one." ~ Bertrand Russell"If we do not succeed, we run the risk of failure." ~ Dan Quayle

Here is a short discussion I had with this fundamentalist in the comments section of the video "Evolution: Fossils, Genes, and Mousetraps (1-9)".

LoricaLady wrote:9:04 Origin of Species is recommended to the students. However it does not meet the aforementioned criterion of "Science is built around theories which are strongly supported by factual evidence..." Darwin showed 0 evidence for any origin of species. He showed 0 evidence - since there is 0 - that finches ever were or ever will be anything but finches. He showed 0 evidence that, seasonal beak changes are going to lead to finches climbing his "Tree of Life" to be nonfinches. Cont.. on 2-9.

jebus6kryst wrote:It is obvious that you have never read The Origins (sic) of Species. I wonder, could you even define evolution in a biological context?,

LoricaLady wrote:Instead of using the presuming omniscience logical fallacy (& I read it as a teen ager) kindly tell me where, I was wrong in what I have said. Where & how does Darwin show any origin of species? How does he demonstrate that finches ever were or ever will be anything but finches? How does he show that beak changes in species leads to genus change & climbs up his "Tree"? Show any evidence for his Tree from any place using logic & science & not logical fallacies & speculation.

jebus6kryst wrote:So you are not, going to define evolution in a biological context? Furthermore, what chapter in Darwin's book covers the finches?

After those two questions are answered we can move on.

LoricaLady wrote:There are various definitions given for evo. The most common one says that it is change over time leading to increasing complexity, and most evolutionists, as Miller demonstrates in this vid, believes that evolution means change over time beyond that of speciation - as seen in fish, to lizards etc. Asking me what chapter talks about finches is totally irrelevant and a major strawman logical fallacy. Are you going to answer my Qs or just keep dodging them. Show your evidence.

jebus6kryst wrote:You cannot even define evolution properly yet somehow think you can argue against it. Evolution is the change in allelic frequencies is (sic) a population over time. I find it amazing, how creationists can never properly define it.

The reason I was asking about the finches is that anyone who has read the book, knows that Darwin did not talk about the finches in any detail. Most of his evidence in his book came from breeding pigeons

jebus6kryst wrote:Seeing as how you did not know either of these basics, why should I waste any more, time on you? However, drop me a message if you would like to continue this because discussion on the comments section of videos is very annoying. Otherwise, I leave you with the last word.

Have a nice day.

LoricaLady wrote:There is no evidence in his book that pigeons were or ever will be anything but pigeons. There is no evidence in his book for anything. It is just armchair speculation that actually flies in, the face of the fossil record.

LoricaLady wrote:Translation: You can't A my Qs (don't feel badly, no one can since all of evo,is a fable based on logical fallacies & dataless armchair speculations posing as evidence) and so you are just going to doge them. No, I will not drop you a, personal message. I am on a mission to help folk in general learn what it took me a long time to learn, so they can out of the evo matrix. Have a truth-filled and logical life.

Anyone who likes to argue through YouTube comments would enjoy this fundamentalist. Her arguments are easy enough to see through and counter.

Both Caiden and Jason believe homosexuality is a choice, and Caiden takes his idiocy another step by claiming it to be a "belief", and doesn't see the connection between threats of eternal hell and bullying.